A new report by the World Bank, “Rising through Cities in Ghana” analyses the rapid transformation of a country whose urban population has grown from 4 million in 1984 to more than 14 million today. 51% of Ghanaians now live in cities. Over the same period annual GDP growth has averaged 5.7%, the number of industrial and service jobs has increased by 21% and the capital city, Accra, has registered a 20% reduction in poverty.

The World Bank report, impressive for its presentation of unique data, comes at an important juncture for Ghana’s urban development. Three points are particularly notable:

Accra is not alone in driving Ghana’s urbanisation. While Accra gains a lot of attention for its role as a megacity on the continent, its primacy has actually declined. In 1984, Accra accounted for 24.4% of the population; by 2010, the figure was 16.6%. The report states that “the number of medium (20,000–50,000 people) and large medium (50,000–100,000) sized towns has quadrupled and tripled respectively.” Big cities like Accra, Kumasi, and Sekondi-Takoradi continue to grow, but an interesting and important area for future research will be the socio-political developments in regional urban centres like Tamale, Tema, Ashaiman, Cape Coast and Aflao.

Planning is not the problem, politics is. Ghana has had a series of plans for its cities since the colonial period. The 1958 Town Plan for Accra recognised the effect that the small and insecure land market had on the provision of housing, and formed state bodies to address the issue. The Strategic Plan of 1991 sought greater collaboration between agencies, as well as coordination with international funders. The World Bank report highlights the same priorities, without outlining a political solution. As my research shows, urban planning and subsequent deadlock is the result of power struggles and political capture. In today’s competitive multi-party environment, leaders make political calculations that privilege short-term horizons to win votes over long-term solutions to urban problems.

To understand inequality, look at the incentives. Politicians and customary authorities have an interest in maintaining a minimum level of informality because they benefit from the status quo. Some traditional authorities benefit from insecure property rights because of the lack of productive land, providing a powerful explanation for why land reform has failed in parts of Ghana. Further, leaders are incentivised by informal norms and duties that shape their behaviour in daily life. The point is that the priorities advanced by this report are embedded in a societal structure that incentivises residents and leaders to undermine urban development. For projects to have the desired results, Ghanaians need to have incentives to follow the policy prescriptions and play by the official rules. Registering land and businesses should be profitable; relocation to new neighbourhoods should consider local architectural, social, and economic preferences; and providing public goods and services to newcomers should contribute to electoral advantages. Currently, this is not the case.